Good Societies Index 2012 Comparing Quality of Life in Relatively Wealthy Societies Ron Anderson University of Minnesota rea@umn.edu For Presentation at the International Society for Quality of Life Studies Venice, Italy, November 2, 2012 1 Background of the Good Society Index The Good Society Index was first constructed in 2009 for presentation at ISQOLS in Florence Good Societies Index 2012 has the following new features: Expanded from 32 to 48 indicators New emphasis on Social Cohesion New future oriented emphasis with indexes on sustainability: social, economic, and environmental Integration of concept of caring capital throughout Inclusion the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) in some analyses December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 2 1
Conceptual Roots The notion of a good society stems from Aristotle and utilitarian philosophy in the West and thinking on social harmony and in the East In the past 3 decades, major new books began to explicate the concept of a good society, e.g., The Good Society by Robert Bellah and associates, 1991 Next: The Road to the Good Society by Amitai Etzioni, 2001 The Good Society by Alan Draper and Ansil Ramsay, 2008 Etzioni advanced the construct by explicating the sociological community element and the moral core. The essence of the latter are community values that treat individuals as ends, thus recognizing the delicate balance between caring communities and individual autonomy. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 3 Building Blocks for Good Societies Many moral strategies and social values have been proposed as building blocks for good societies. Etzioni argues that all of these approaches need be considered in refinements in the evolving conceptions and practices of good societies. One of the most detailed approaches to delineating basic building blocks of good societies is the human capabilities approach of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum. Their contribute includes Physical well being Civil and Political rights Social justice December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 4 2
Caring Capital The most critical, underdeveloped dimension of good societies is that of mutual caring. Recent work in that area by sociologists includes: Toward a Caring Society by S. and P. Oliner Acts of Compassion by R. Wuthrow Caring Capital Information, Communication and Society by R. Anderson Caring capital is that subset of social capital characterized by compassion, caring, and altruism when these actions are intended for the primary purpose of others well-being. The object of altruistic or caring capital is to avoid or reduce suffering of all human beings. For individuals & networks of communities to come to value caring capital would transform them into good societies. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 5 Caring Capital (cont.) Caring capital typically involves diverse types of informal giving of care not necessarily dependent upon formal exchanges of goods or services. Caring capital cross cuts both bonding and bridging capital. Caring capital can be institutional/organizational as well as individual. Good societies foster institutions that promote informal caring capital and create social policies that formalize caring capital activities and services. These principles are infused throughout the Good Society Index December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 6 3
Methodological Roots Social Indicators movement; new journal in 1974 International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies founded in 1996 OECD World Forums on Measuring the Progress of Societies UNDP (Development Programme) Human Development Indexes (HDI) reporting project Quality of Life Index from the Economist magazine s Economist Intelligence Unit Gallup Global Well Being surveys in 155 nations Progress in combining three types of indicators: 1. Official government statistics, e.g., life expectancy 2. Responses to international questionnaire surveys, e. g., attitudes 3. Existing, published indexes with a narrow scope, e.g., Free Press December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 7 How we measure characteristics that reflect good societies? 48 social indicators representing either processes or outcomes of good societies: These 48 indicators organized into 12 categories or components called indexes. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 8 4
Good Societies Index 2012 Twelve Components* (& Sample Indicators) 1 Economic Sustainability (Income, inequality) 2 Child Well-Being (Often eating with parents) 3 Safety (Few homicides) 4 Health (Self-reported health, incidence of AIDS) 5 Non-Violence (Low arms exports) 6 Integrity & Social Justice (Corruption-free organizations) 7 Civil Society (Freedom of the Press) 8 Compassion (Caregiving time, also hosting refugees) 9 Environmental Sustainability (Emissions, renewables) 10 Education (Reading, graduation rates) 11 Social Sustainability (Subjective well-being, migration) 12 Social Cohesion (Trust, tolerance, union membership) December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 9 Countries in the Main Good Societies Index, 2012 The Twenty Most Affluent* Countries Australia Germany Portugal Austria Ireland Spain Belgium Italy Sweden Canada Japan Switzerland Denmark Netherlands United Kingdom Finland New Zealand United States France Norway *These were the most affluent countries in 2009, after eliminating countries with populations under 3 million. **The BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) added in some analyses. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 10 5
Calculation of the Good Societies Index Steps 1. Locate the statistic (e.g., % or mean) for each country for any given indicator 2. Calculate standard scores (z-scores) by subtracting each county statistic, x, from the mean of all countries, and dividing the result by the standard deviation of all countries 3. Re-standardize each z-score to give each set of scores a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, just like an intelligence test score 4. After this is done for all the indicators in a component set, e.g., health, then the mean of all non-missing scores is calculated for each country, to produce the component index score. 5. The Good Societies (overall) Index is the mean for each country across all eight component scores. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 11 A Glimpse at the Scores for 20 countries & 12 Components Good Society Index 1. Economic Sustainability Index i2. Child Well-being Index 3. Safety Index 4. Health & Health-care Index 5. Non-Violence Index (All Components) 6. Integrity and Social Justice Index 7. Civil Society Index 8. Compassion Index 9. Environmental Sustainability 10. Education 11. Social Sustain-ability Index 12 Social Cohesion Index Australia 96 98 104 100 93 97 105 98 81 98 111 102 98 Overall (average) Good Society Index Austria 106 101 97 99 111 96 101 107 107 94 99 96 101 Belgium 96 110 95 105 103 101 104 98 92 97 86 103 99 Canada 100 95 103 106 103 110 100 107 96 99 103 107 102 Denmark 117 106 97 104 103 109 115 103 95 94 109 107 105 Finland 107 106 96 98 109 114 110 99 106 114 105 117 106 France 103 97 100 98 92 92 84 90 104 89 91 85 93 Germany 100 92 101 97 102 92 103 104 97 104 90 96 98 Ireland 85 100 98 106 103 96 96 104 88 92 107 97 97 Italy 84 109 105 96 103 99 85 90 101 97 88 96 96 Japan 97 111 110 102 112 91 87 100 102 112 90 89 100 Netherlands 109 109 105 105 95 106 114 110 91 101 104 108 104 New Zealand 99 86 105 100 102 106 108 110 113 108 100 98 102 Norway 115 106 109 108 102 108 115 114 106 100 109 111 108 Portugal 93 99 94 89 117 97 89 97 109 99 75 86 95 Spain 92 102 97 97 109 96 97 86 96 88 94 98 96 Sweden 106 104 107 102 93 108 118 118 119 95 108 118 107 Switzerland 109 109 108 110 102 111 97 96 111 110 120 94 106 UK 95 86 98 101 81 91 87 94 98 101 93 94 93 United States 82 72 80 70 68 73 78 91 79 90 101 92 85 6
. Country Tiers below are Based upon Rankings on the Good Society Index and the Similarity of Inter-correlations among 12 Index Components Top Tier Middle Tier Bottom Tier Sweden Japan United States Norway Australia United Kingdom Finland Canada France Switzerland Germany Spain Netherlands Austria Portugal Note: The remaining countries are all in Europe & fall into the Middle Tier. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 14 7
1 Economic Sustainability Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Inequality-adjusted income Income downgraded for inequality OECD. Society at a Glance, 2011. Low Adult Poverty Employment Technology Innovation Policies Percent below 50% of median income (reversed*) Working portion of working eligible in ages 15-64 Adjusted for global impacts UN Dev. Program, Human Development Report, 2011 OECD Employment Outlook, 2011 Center for Global Development, 2011 *Reversed means to make larger values lower on a scale and vice versa. For example, subtracting a percent from 100, reverses the values. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 15 8
2 Child Well-Being Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Low child poverty Percent of children living below poverty line (reversed*) OECD Growing Unequal 2008 Low percent living in single-parent families Low % of children often eating evening meal with parents Few births to teens Percent of children age 11, 13,15 in single-parenting (rev.*) Age 15 self-report (reversed*) Births per 1,000 mothers age 15-19 (reversed*) OECD Family Database, mid-2000s UNICEF Innnocenti Report Card, 2007 and OECD PISA OECD, Society at a Glance, 2011 *Reversed means to make larger values lower on a scale and vice versa. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 17 Child Well Being Index Denmark Finland Sweden Norway Switzerland Netherlands Belgium Austria Japan Australia Germany Italy France United Kingdom Spain Canada Portugal Ireland New Zealand United States 75 117 115 114 114 109 106 106 104 103 98 98 98 97 96 95 93 91 91 88 0 50 100 150 9
3 Safety Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Low homicide rate National Security Index Life Expectancy Few road fatalities Homicide rate (reversed) Index of Aid to Developing Countries, 2009 Total Life Expectancy at birth Road fatalities per million population (reversed) UN Office on Drugs and Crime, 2010 Center for Global Development, Commit. To Development Index OECD, Health Database, 2010. OECD, Factbook, 2008. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 19 3 Safety Index Japan Norway Switzerland Sweden New Zealand Netherlands Italy Australia Canada Germany France United Kingdom Ireland Spain Denmark Austria Finland Belgium Portugal United States 80 110 109 108 107 105 105 105 104 103 101 100 98 98 97 97 97 96 95 94 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 December 22, 2012 20 10
4 Health & Heathcare Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Self-reported good health Life expectancy at birth, 2007 OECD Society at a Glance, 2011. Low incidence of AIDS Low obesity Low avoidable hospital admissions for congestive heart failure (CHF) AIDS rate (reversed) Percent obese age 15+ (reversed) Avoidable admissions for CHF (reversed) OECD, Health at a Glance, 2009 OECD Factbook, 2010. OECD, Health at a Glance, 2009 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 21 11
5 Non-Violence Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Contributions to peace Low Total Armed Forces per capita Low defense spending per person Low arms exports per person Index of Contributions to Global Peace Total Armed Forces per capita (reversed) Per capita spending for defense in 2008 (reversed) Arms exports per capita, 2009 (reversed) Economist Intelligence Unit, 2008 The Military Balance, 2010 The Military Balance, 2010 Stockholm Int l Peace Research Institute, 2010 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 23 12
6 Integrity & Justice Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Corruption-free organizations Corporate Social Responsibility Corruption Perceptions Index, 2009 Index of Corporate Social Responsibility Transparency International Scand. J. of Management 25 (2009), 10-22. Protection of Citizens from Surveillance Low prison populations International Privacy Index Privacy International, 2007 Prisoners per 100,000 persons in 2009 (reversed) OECD Society at a Glance, 2011 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 25 Integrity & Social Justice Index Italy Portugal Finland Belgium Switzerland Spain Canada Germany Norway Japan Sweden France Denmark Netherlands Ireland Australia Austria United Kingdom New Zealand United States 72 111 108 106 105 105 105 105 102 102 101 100 100 99 99 99 98 96 94 94 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 13
7 Civil Society Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Democracy Index Turnout in national elections Freedom of the press Women members of Parliament/Congress Democracy rating by nation Percent voting in most recent parliamentary/congressional elections Index of Freedom of the Press Percent of members who are women in 2011 or earliest year Economist Intelligence Unit, 2008 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 2010 Freedom House, Global Press Freedom, 2009 UNDP (2011), Human Development Report 2011- Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future for All. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 27 7 Civil Society Index Sweden Norway Denmark Netherlands Finland New Zealand Australia Belgium Germany Austria Canada Switzerland Spain Ireland Portugal United Kingdom Japan Italy France United States 118 115 115 114 110 108 105 104 103 101 100 97 97 96 89 87 87 85 84 78 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 14
8 Compassion Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Kindness & helpfulness of peers Refugees hosted per citizen Government aid to developing countries Caregiving minutes per day Percent of children age 11, 13, 15, who reported kind peers Refugees hosted per 1,000 citizens Index of Aid to Developing Countries, 2009 OECD Health Behavior of School age Children study, 2001 UM Refugee Agency Statistical Yearbook, 2008 Center for Global Development, Commit. To Development Index OECD (2011), Society at a Glance 2011 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 29 One indicator is amount of Aid to Developing Countries The index takes into account the quality as well as quantity of the aid given. For instance, military aid is weighted much less than unencumbered economic assistance. Netherlands Switzerland United Kingdom New Zealand United States 8c. Index of Aid to Developing Countries Sweden Denmark Norway Ireland Finland Belgium Canada France Spain Australia Germany Austria Portugal Italy Japan 5.7 5.6 5.2 5 4.8 4.4 4.3 3.6 3.4 3.4 3.2 2.8 2.3 2.1 0.9 9.8 11.7 11.2 12.2 14.3 0 5 10 15 20 Axis Title December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 30 15
9 Environmental Sustainability Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Low Carbon Dioxide Emissions Environmental Performance Index. Low Municipal Waste per capita Tons per capita (reversed) UNDP Composite Index Municipal waste per capita in 2005 (reversed) UNDP Human Development Report, 2011. UNDP Human Development Report, 2011. OCED Factbook 2008. Renewables share of energy Government social expenditures OECD (2011), Society at a in 2005 Glance 2011 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 32 16
9 Environmental Sustainability Index Sweden New Zealand Switzerland Portugal Austria Norway Finland France Japan Italy United Kingdom Germany Spain Canada Denmark Belgium Netherlands Ireland Australia United States 119 113 111 109 107 106 106 104 102 101 98 97 96 96 95 92 91 88 81 79 Includes indicators on carbon emissions, municipal waste and energy consumed, all per capita. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 33 10 Education Index Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Upper Secondary School Graduation Rates Adult Education Participation Rates Reading Competencies Teacher salary levels Percent of children age 11, 13, 15, who reported kind peers Adults 25-64 who enroll at any educational level PISA assessment of 15-year olds in 2009 Ratio of teacher salary to GDP per capita OECD (2011) Education at a Glance, 2011 OECD (2011) Education at a Glance, 2011 OECD (2011) Society at a Glance, 2011 OECD (2011) Education at a Glance, 2011 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 34 17
10 Education Index Finland Japan Switzerland New Zealand Germany United Kingdom Netherlands Norway Portugal Canada Australia Italy Belgium Sweden Denmark Austria Ireland United States France Spain 114 112 110 108 104 101 101 100 99 99 98 97 97 95 94 94 92 90 89 88 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 35 11 Social Sustainability Index Indicator Data Used Source Sustainable Society Index Public Confidence in Social Institutions Sustainable Society Foundation, 2012 http://www.ssfindex.com/ Question from Gallup World Poll OECD (2011) Society at a 2010 Glance, 2011 Economist s Quality of Life Index Composite Index 2005 Economist Intelligence Unit Migration Inflow Government social expenditures OECD Factbook, 2010 in 2005 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 36 18
Social Sustainability Is social process and institution focused, designing strategies and tactics toward desired futures. Emphasizes the inter-relatedness of environmental and economic systems in social functioning Is future focused, defining desired states, goals and meanings December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 37 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 38 19
12 Social Cohesion Indicators Indicator Data Used Source Trust Tolerance of community diversity Union Membership Families or domestic partnerships Percent of adults who self-report trust Percent who say their community is good place for various minorities Union members as percent of employed in 2002 OECD (2011) Society at a Glance, 2011 OECD (2011) Society at a Glance, 2011 Lesch (2004) (see footnotes) Government social expenditures OECD (2011) Society at a in 2005 Glance, 2011 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 39 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 40 20
12 Social Cohesion Index Sweden Finland Norway Netherlands Canada Denmark Belgium Australia Spain New Zealand Ireland Italy Austria Germany Switzerland United Kingdom United States Japan Portugal France 118 117 111 108 107 107 103 102 98 98 97 96 96 96 94 94 92 89 86 85 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 41 Good Society Index is closely related to Lower Levels of Subjective Suffering *For analysis with BRIC countries, a 9-item short form of the GSI was used. 42 21
Good Society Index and Suffering including BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, & China) December 22, 2012 *For analysis with BRIC countries, a 9-item short form of the GSI was used. 43 Good Society Index* compared to the UNDP Human Development Index 2011 *For analysis with BRIC countries, a 9-item short form of the GSI was used. 44 22
Conclusion 1 of 4 a) Quality of life differences among affluent societies obviously can not be explained by economics (wealth or income) alone. The meaning of others to members of a society underlies the functioning of good societies. b) How people view their responsibilities for each other and their commitment for caring capital and compassionate action shapes the distribution of well-being in societies. Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 45 Conclusion 2 of 4 a) Consistent with numerous comparative analysts (such as Lindert (2004), Pontusso (2005), and Kenworthy (2004)) the Nordic countries topped the Good Societies Index. b) Countries like the USA, where neo-liberal economics predominate, did very poorly on all dimensions of the Index. One can point to the weakness of several of the indicators, but it is difficult to dismiss the overall profile of the results. c) These results confirm that it is not necessary for an affluent society to be an individualistic, antigovernment society. Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 46 23
Conclusion 3 of 4 a) It may be surprising to some that the United States falls at or near the bottom of each of the eight Good Societies dimensions. Furthermore, on prison rates, obesity, murders, and defense spending, the USA is not just higher, but two to three times higher than the next highest nation. b) These measures of national character were not arbitrarily selected, but chosen to reflect the good society framework. c) While critics might argue for selection of different indicators, these results shown here give cause to pause and reflect on how countries like the USA, at the low end of the Good Society Index, could change course and improve the well-being of all its citizens. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 47 Conclusion 4 of 4 a) Most of the 20 most affluent countries clustered around the middle range of the continuum of indicators for the Good Society. The fact that few of the countries scored at extremely high points on the indicators suggests how challenging it is for a rich society to become or remain a Good Society. b) We who enjoy the comfort of living in these rich societies should not forget about the many millions who live with us but struggle daily from homelessness, discrimination, and even hunger. December 22, 2012 Ron Anderson rea@umn.edu 48 24
For further information about the Good Societies Index 2012 Contact:: Ron Anderson University of Minnesota rea@umn.edu 49 25